More Ron Paul Myths

Andrew Sullivan is attributing otherworldly characteristics to Ron Paul. For example:

He will accept support from any quarter and compared with the corporate money flowing into the other candidates’ coffers, he is about as independent as a presidential candidate can be.

Not only does this not make sense, it’s utterly inaccurate. If Ron Paul isn’t turning anyone away, that means he’s accepting corporate donations. And he is.

Microsoft, Boeing, Lockheed Martin. And Mason Capital Management, his fifth largest contributor, is all about Wall Street and the financial sector.

To be fair, Mitt Romney’s contributors are, predictably, almost entirely Wall Street contributors. However, very few of President Obama’s top contributors are from the financial sector.

All of that said, to suggest that Ron Paul is independent of corporate money is absurd.

Print Friendly
This entry was posted in Election 2012 and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.
  • http://drangedinaz.wordpress.com/ IrishGrrrl

    Can Sullivan actually be this naive? Surely not. Not even the independently wealthy candidate, like R0mney, is free of corporate sponsors. Has there ever been a national political figure that was actually free of corporate sponsors? This is just Sullivan trying desperately to find someone on the Right to believe in…no matter how absurd. Otherwise, he’d actually have to get behind Pres. Obama for real and that would be the end of Sullivan’s career probably. I think this is Sullivan being Sullivan, either delusional or playing to the audience or both.

    • http://www.politicalruminations.com/ nicole

      He’s just supporting Paul while pretending that he’s not really supporting Paul.

  • jjasonham

    In this article Sullivan also goes on:

    And so [Democrats] spend enormous energy persuading themselves that Paul is actually a paranoid, anti-Semitic, racist bigot, and so need not be engaged seriously. And the neocons are only thrilled to help out (since Paul remains the one candidate in either party who will not launch their longed-for war on Iran). I find in this much that was ascendant on the left in the 1990s: an identity politics purism in which the entirety of moral discourse is distilled to exposing variously illicit prejudices or associations toward various groups of people. Sometimes, this verges on total parody.

    Outrageous. As if judging Obama with political/ideological purism isn’t where Sullivan, Greenwald, etc. continue to receive their incomes.

    • http://mdblanche.myopenid.com/ mdblanche

      Um, when someone’s position on Israel wins the praise of the Grand Wizard of the KKK (oops, there I go exposing various illicit associations), there just might something a little anti-Semitic about it.

      • nathkatun7

        That’s exactly the way I feel! Surely, the KKK grand wizard can’t be in favor of Ron Paul if Ron Paul was strongly opposed to white supremacy and anti-semitism.

  • http://www.politicalruminations.com/ nicole

    Paul has also been endorsed, and accepted campaign contribs from despicable white supremacist groups, anti-semitic groups, and anti-gay groups.

    If you haven’t yet read Sullivan’s series of idiotic posts on iq and race, you should. Those posts, that POV combined with his Ron Paul love convinced me that the man is not someone whose opinion I value.

    Ta-Nehisi Coates responded to Sullivan on the iq thing: http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2011/11/the-race-iq-blackout/249105/

    • http://drangedinaz.wordpress.com/ IrishGrrrl

      Well, I enjoy reading Sullivan MOST of the time…but he does have some really stupid ideas (including the iq and race thing). I think, perhaps, that because he’s British, went to an upper crust school and has been fairly well protected by a band of conservative journalists and industry insiders that he is lives in a bubble. I don’t think he gets just how the “average” person feels or experiences America. That all being said, I still enjoy reading his take on things simply because it makes me think. As for agreeing with him? Hardly ever. He’s just wonderful grist for my blog mill ;)

    • jjasonham

      Man, Nicole! You always seem to force off my rose-colored glasses with your posts and links. More shocking statements from the blogosphere that, until now, I’ve been able to avoid.

      • http://www.politicalruminations.com/ nicole

        um, sorry, jjason. :)

  • nellcote

    Not sticking up for Sullivan here and you can mock him all you want but where is the pushback at The Nation, Salon, Huffington Post for their support for Ron Paul. I think they are the greater betrayals, if not outright ratfucking.

    • http://www.politicalruminations.com/ nicole

      They all deserve it, but you can only do so much in a day. Bob is only 1 man.

  • mikemcmack

    Blaahhh. Obama receives more than 10 times more corporate donations as Paul, but somehow we’re supposed to believe Paul is worse than Obama as far as corporate sponsors?

    • http://www.politicalruminations.com/ nicole

      Oh please………if Ron Paul had a chance in hell of winning, the corp sponsors, most especially Wall Street, would be lined up to throw money at him.

      If your comment was snark, please excuse the “oh please”. Hard to tell sometimes.

  • http://twitter.com/OleCardDead OCD

    What a load of crap.

    Guess where everyday Americans get their money? They work for a living and get paid by folks like Microsoft, GE, Boeing.

    All people who contribute more than $250 a year have to submit their employment information for contribution monitoring. As such, the opensecrets link will how how much each group of people (microsoft employees, US air force employees, etc) donate collectively.

    Do you think the Army directly contributes to Ron Paul or any other candidate? Please.